What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

I don't think Jeff Bezos donates enough (Was - Bezos is pathetic) (1 Viewer)

LOL at leading contributor. The leading contributors to the loss of retail jobs are the internet and a global economy.

Retail is a dinosaur business model for delivering goods to consumers, some are trying to adapt to not get left behind like Wal-Mart but many retail chains are quickly going the way of the dodo. I am not going to shed a tear over the jobs lost at Borders, Circuit City, Toys R Us, Sears, etc. when they themselves put thousands upon thousands of mom and pops out of business when the big box retail store business model was on the rise. At least Amazon somewhat embraces mom & pop's and small businesses by letting them sell on their website.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Buckna said:
LOL at leading contributor. The leading contributors to the loss of retail jobs are the internet and a global economy.

Retail is a dinosaur business model for delivering goods to consumers, some are trying to adapt to not get left behind like Wal-Mart but many retail chains are quickly going the way of the dodo. I am not going to shed a tear over the jobs lost at Borders, Circuit City, Toys R Us, Sears, etc. when they themselves put thousands upon thousands of mom and pops out of business when the big box retail store business model was on the rise.
Click to expand...
There is no doubt Amazon is the most used website to purchase a whole slew of goods. I think you are misunderstanding my point. I am not blaming Amazong for taking away those retail jobs. I am saying we shouldn't credit Amazong as some amazing job creator. 

 
Ilov80s said:
I think the more core issue here is one better fit for the Politics Forum as ofcourse people would give him less grief about charity if he wasn't so rich due to paying more taxes or paying employees higher wages. The wealth gap in the United States and worldwide is a massive issue that eventually will have to be addressed. 
Click to expand...
Does someone having multiple billions of something that in reality has artificial value REALLY affect you? 

 
D-Day said:
Does someone having multiple billions of something that in reality has artificial value REALLY affect you? 
Click to expand...
Yes the amount of money major corporations pay their employees does impact me. So do the tax rates for the wealthy.

 
Ilov80s said:
Yes the amount of money major corporations pay their employees does impact me. So do the tax rates for the wealthy.
Click to expand...
What's awesome about this country is that if someone feels they are underpaid, they can quit and find another job. Or start their own business...internet, retail, whatever.

 
Ilov80s said:
Yes the amount of money major corporations pay their employees does impact me. So do the tax rates for the wealthy.
Click to expand...
Because Bezos has billions does not change the market value of those jobs.  Also, he does not pay taxes on the value of his stock (from which is where most of his wealth comes) until he sells.  So you could increase the tax rate to 95%, and unless he sells his stock, no additional money is owed.  Now, if you want to get at the wealth of the ultra rich, you would need to implement some type of consumption tax that would hit these type of individuals substantially more than the general population.
 

 
eoMMan said:
What's awesome about this country is that if someone feels they are underpaid, they can quit and find another job. Or start their own business...internet, retail, whatever.
Click to expand...
That's oversimplifying things quite a bit. When health care costs are factored in, compensation for the average employee in the United States hasn't grown since the 80s. If everyone started their own business, most would fail and go into debt because the market does not have a nee for 300 million redundant businsesses. That is the model we used to have but those small independently owned businesses got choked out by large corporations a long time ago. Yes it is still possible for someone to start a business and be successful. However, that is not a route that most people can go. 

D-Day said:
Because Bezos has billions does not change the market value of those jobs.  Also, he does not pay taxes on the value of his stock (from which is where most of his wealth comes) until he sells.  So you could increase the tax rate to 95%, and unless he sells his stock, no additional money is owed.  Now, if you want to get at the wealth of the ultra rich, you would need to implement some type of consumption tax that would hit these type of individuals substantially more than the general population.
 
Click to expand...
Which is why I said the real core of the matter here is better for the Political thread. It really isn't just about Bezos- it's the core of a bigger issue. 

 
Anyway, I will leave because this is all out of the spirit of the forum. Have a good day everyone and stay warm!

 
Stompin' Tom Connors said:
In general, would agree that those with power and money should feel compelled to use that wealth to give back. I don't see how we could ever dictate how much and to what causes. 
Click to expand...


Ilov80s said:
I think the more core issue here is one better fit for the Politics Forum as ofcourse people would give him less grief about charity if he wasn't so rich due to paying more taxes or paying employees higher wages. The wealth gap in the United States and worldwide is a massive issue that eventually will have to be addressed. 
Click to expand...
Alexandria Ocaio Cortez wants to implement a 70% income tax for earners of $10MM per year.
Is that overkill? Why not 100%? 

 
The guy probably gained a billion and then suddenly lost 3 or 4 billion. And that was just today and just in after market trading.

But why doesn’t he give more away?!!!?!?!!???

 
rockaction said:
The machinery of socialism is oiled with the blood of everybody.   :pokey:
Click to expand...
I'm a Conservative Capitalist business owner trying to make a billion dollars in my lifetime and doesn't want anyone preventing me from achieving that goal but even I know that is simply untrue.  I think you meant Communism (really we're talking about Dictatorships).

Capitalism is great but America seems to practice a diminishing form of Capitalism. We are morphing into some kind of Oligarchical Corporatocracy (Cleptocracy?) and Bezos is one of the drivers of the subjugation of small business.  I'm all for competing, it drives a lot of innovation, but is it really competing when the competition are the richest companies in the world?  I mean, at some point do we just declare Bezos the winner and give him the keys to the Country?

 
Chaka said:
I'm a Conservative Capitalist business owner trying to make a billion dollars in my lifetime and doesn't want anyone preventing me from achieving that goal but even I know that is simply untrue.  I think you meant Communism (really we're talking about Dictatorships).

Capitalism is great but America seems to practice a diminishing form of Capitalism. We are morphing into some kind of Oligarchical Corporatocracy (Cleptocracy?) and Bezos is one of the drivers of the subjugation of small business.  I'm all for competing, it drives a lot of innovation, but is it really competing when the competition are the richest companies in the world?  I mean, at some point do we just declare Bezos the winner and give him the keys to the Country?
Click to expand...
I was being snarky, bud. I figured I could kid with you. And I could, it seems. Thanks for your response.  

But I actually do mean socialism as we currently understand it, because for true socialism, industrialism will need to run its course and we need to acquire all the data points that go into managing an economy. 

I also agree that corporations have way too much power. If we had stuck with the Founders's original conception of both business, the warranty of merchantability, and corporate status we'd be much better off. Don't forget, people that passed the Constitution were part agrarian, only had been convinced that city industry wouldn't get too big and wouldn't swallow out the burgeoning republic.  

I think a reactionary stance is the best way to go about our current predicament, but unfortunately, we've asked for more government and state control over the economy -- and along with corporate control, it reeks of economic fascism. 

I have a left-libertarian streak as well as a rightist one.  

 
bigbottom said:
It’s sort of interesting to me that he has created a vehicle whereby a portion of his company’s profits can be directed to charity (Amazon Smile).  I’m not sure what the numbers are, but I would think they’d have to be substantial. Still, I’d like to see him be a bit more philanthropic on a personal level. 
Click to expand...
I think it was the Freakinomics podcast that explored the charitable side of corporations and found employees were willing to work for less if there was the impression the company gave to or participated in charitable work. Consumers are also more likely to purchase goods and services too. Basically corporations are not doing it to be charitable..... it’s all about the bottom line.

Personally there isn’t much that drives me crazier than corporations asking me to donate money to causes at checkout. If they really cared about the cause they would donate themselves but it’s more about trying to appear charitable than anything else

 
Dickies said:
I think it was the Freakinomics podcast that explored the charitable side of corporations and found employees were willing to work for less if there was the impression the company gave to or participated in charitable work. Consumers are also more likely to purchase goods and services too. Basically corporations are not doing it to be charitable..... it’s all about the bottom line.

Personally there isn’t much that drives me crazier than corporations asking me to donate money to causes at checkout. If they really cared about the cause they would donate themselves but it’s more about trying to appear charitable than anything else
Click to expand...
Or when an employer pressures you to give to their favourite charity without at least matching your contribution.

 
Dickies said:
I think it was the Freakinomics podcast that explored the charitable side of corporations and found employees were willing to work for less if there was the impression the company gave to or participated in charitable work. Consumers are also more likely to purchase goods and services too. Basically corporations are not doing it to be charitable..... it’s all about the bottom line.

Personally there isn’t much that drives me crazier than corporations asking me to donate money to causes at checkout. If they really cared about the cause they would donate themselves but it’s more about trying to appear charitable than anything else
Click to expand...
Sure, there is no doubt that Amazon Smile drives purchases. Why buy something from a different on-line retailer when I can buy it from Amazon and have a portion of the purchase price go to my favorite charity?  So it drives business, makes consumers feel good, and helps charitable causes. Seems like a win all the way around and that’s okay with me.

As for the checkout line, I agree that it can be annoying because it’s almost like panhandling - being asked to give something you didn’t choose in a situation where you do not expect the solicitation. Also it’s never apparent whether the store itself is giving to the cause, as opposed to just providing access to all its customers. That said, I’m sure it’s not annoying to the cause that is benefiting and the good works they do, so my initial flash of annoyance is always fleeting. That said, as someone who runs a charitable organization, I am always focused on donor engagement and ever vigilant to avoid donor fatigue. It’s why we’ve chosen not to participate in Giving Tuesday, and don’t include a “donate now” button on our Facebook posts (every time we post we are asked if we want to include such a button).

 
Leroy Hoard said:
Or when an employer pressures you to give to their favourite charity without at least matching your contribution.
Click to expand...
I really like the companies that match their employees’ charitable giving. It places the choice of whether to give, and which organizations to give to, entirely in the hands of the employees.  This way the company is both giving to charity and promoting philanthropy amongst its employees in a completely non-pressure way. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top